Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Concrete trumps steel in CO 2 stakes, claims research


Less energy is used and less CO 2 produced during construction of a concrete bridge than a steel or composite alternative, claims a study to be published in the next edition of the ICE's Bridge Engineering journal.

Benaim director David Collings has drawn together data from real bridge projects to produce comparative energy and carbon dioxide footprints for steel and concrete.

His research suggests that the energy required to build a medium or long-span bridge will always be lower if concrete is used for the primary structural members than if steel or steelconcrete composite construction is used.

Steel Construction Institute manager of sustainability Michael Sampson conceded that concrete beat steel on embodied energy used during construction, but urged engineers to look ahead to demolition.

'Steel goes into other steel products; at best concrete will be crushed and used as fill, ' Sampson said.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.